Re: Space funding (was Re: Hillary needs to quit)

On Apr 19, 11:36 pm, "Dano" <janeandd...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> Pete B wrote:
> > In article <kpCdnW2jcYFdvZTVnZ2dnUVZ_tqtn...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>,
> > janeandd...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
 says...

> >> See that is the fundemental difference between us.  To me. NASA is
> >> the diversion.  It is not an over-riding concern that we can't live
> >> without. It's that damn simple.  Go ahead now toss some more verbal
> >> hand grenades. Demean and attempt to denigrate my point of view as
> >> that of someone who can't possibly understand your grandiose
> >> ventures to the planets.  I prefer to remain grounded and concern
> >> myself with the many problems we have to deal with everyday on terra
> >> firma.
>
> > The fault is you believe it is either or. It isn't. People don't care
> > that much about other people. That is why. Not because nasa and others
> > get a few dimes.
>
> Apparently that may be true of you.  Why then should I give a **** about
> paying for humans to spread that into the cosmos?  If what you say is
> true...and I'm not saying it is...why the interest in sharing our
species
> with the universe?  The fault is with this cynical attitude and the idea
> that professing it will encourage anyone to indulge the very notion of
space
> exploration.

Inflicting our species on other planets won't do anything for those
other planets.

So why should we, say, start a colony on Mars or something like that?

How much *do* people care about other people? They _can_ care a lot,
under the right cir***stances. When a foreign country is hit by a
volcano or a tsunami or something like that, many people will help.
This is because they feel they can make a real difference - if they
solve this special, one-time problem, then afterwards the people in
that country will be able to take care of themselves well enough.

But if there are so many hungry people that we can only feed a few of
them, and there's no sign of progress towards solving the underlying
problems, then, yes, people will ask if there's a point to it.

And if we're talking about foreign countries that give evidence of not
liking us, we will worry first about protecting ourselves from them.

Survival comes first. The furry little animals know this, and so do
we.

The Earth has a lot of problems. And we don't know for sure we even
*can* solve all of them. A colony on Mars would mean that *no matter
what*, our science and technology, our literature, our music, and some
of our descendants *would survive*. And someday they would be in a
position to come back and help us, with the vast resources of the rest
of the Solar System, if we did need it.

If you take away the fear of obliteration from people, and give them
hope for the future, they are more likely to behave rationally.

John Savard